The whole thing of having some coaches get a vote in the coaches’ poll, and others not getting one, would be considered grounds for corruption in other sports. Having a vote in the poll leaves you open to accusations of gaming the system (if you use it to your advantage) or hurting your own team (if you vote against your own interests). This year was far from the first time that a couple of coaches with their own interests at stake were asked to make picks that would either put their team, or their conference’s team, into the BCS Championship Game, and they were damned if they did and damned if they didn’t.
I’m struggling to think of another sport in the world where coaches (or directors, or whoever) get a vote on whether or not their own team gets to play for the championship. As the system stands, I can’t blame any of the coaches for voting the way they did this year, but it does point out how bad the system is.
#2 - Again, what is with this OSU talk? You watched the Fiesta bowl, right? The end result of the bowl games showed me that there are about 5 teams that are all very close (Oregon, Wisconsin, Stanford, Ok St, Arkansas) - none of them made the case they are better than the others.
One thing the game did was convince me to take Tony Bruno off my twitter feed this morning - he sent 48 fuckin’ tweets (yes, I counted) last night bitching about the game, matchup, etc. WTF?
Oregon and Wisconsin had two regular season losses, so they’re out. Stanford and Arkansas didn’t win their conferences, so they’re out. Alabama didn’t win their conference either, so they should’ve been out too. Bowl games, including the NC, are decided based on the regular season.
This guy has lost what grip he had on reality if he imagines such a statement will get any attention beyond laughter and scorn. You have a month to prepare, your top-ranked team (which some have been touting as best-ever) absolutely shames itself in The Big Game, and you want people to believe you deserve a share of the title?
Miles needs to learn the first rule of holes: when you’re in one, stop digging.
This seems to be getting frequent mention as an absolute principle. Is there some sort of law that says the two best teams can’t possibly be in the same conference?
If so, please explain how this comes to be. If not, please explain why we should embrace a principle that has the potential to prevent the two best teams from playing for the NC.
I doubt that many people think Alabama wasn’t good enough to play in the title game. The big issues are of bias and self-interest (if not outright corruption) in the BCS process.
I agree that “you must be a conference champion” is a poor requirement for the BCS.
What we really need to do is get voting of all kinds out of the equation. The coaches vote by self-interest, the Harris poll is a bunch of people who may not even watch that much football, and the AP writers certainly have their own agendas as well.
And this is what a lot of people seem to have trouble comprehending. It’s not about offense. It’s really not. Until people realize this and get away from the spread schemes and the gimmickry, and start refocusing on the absolute nature of football - that you MUST dominate your opponent on the line of scrimmage, schools like Alabama, with the big, ugly guys with wide mean streaks, are going to win almost every time.
It’s not about entertaining the viewers (or at least not the ones who seem incapable of appreciating that offense is less than half of the game.) It’s about winning a game of football, and you do that by being bigger, stronger, faster, and meaner.
OSU would have scored a couple of early TD’s, I’m sure, but where LSU manned up and stopped Bama in the red zone over and over last night, Richardson would have blown through OSU for multiple touchdowns, and it still would have been a rout.
If rematches should be disallowed in the national championship game, what incentive is there for contenders teams to play other contenders for the national Championship.
Why would LSU play Oregon? (happened this year)
Why would Ohio State play USC? (happened a couple of years ago)
Why would Notre Dame play Oklahoma? (happens next year)
These are not conference games, they are optional games.
Ogre, what’s the situation like for Bama next year? How many guys are expected to return? I thought I heard something like 10 of the defensive starters heading into this past season were underclassmen, but I don’t recall specifically. Agreed on your other points about how to win games, though. Who’s going to challenge them in the SEC?
There are 4 SEC teams in the top 10. Besides LSU and Alabama, there’s Arkansas and South Carolina. Not sure about SC’s graduating seniors, but Arkansas is returning several, including their star RB, who was out with a pre-season MCL. Might be enough to get over the hump.
Auburn might be rebuilt now, though the loss of Gus Malzahn as OC has to hurt.
Likewise, Florida might be more competitive in Muschamp’s second year as coach.
Also, LSU, as poorly as they performed, can’t be ignored, even in off years.
And who knows, maybe A&M or Missouri completely overachieve and win it all (I keed, I keed).
Personally I have no problem believing Alabama and LSU were the two best teams this year. My only problem is the idea that the National Championship is supposed to match the two best teams. IN my mind it should match the two best teams AND do so in a way that expands our data points to try and assess teams and conferences against one another. By having Alabama and LSU play each other, which was not just a re-match but also a match up of teams that played many common opponents it did not provide the cross section and variety we need to truly determine who is deserving of the NC. Granted it is just one game, but I think we have a better idea than we do with a intra-conference championship game.
No, I’m arguing that the results of a bowl game (“You watched the Fiesta Bowl, right?”) should not be used to argue the merits of one team unless you’re going to do the same for all teams.
Based on what I saw in the bowl games, Oklahoma State should be #2, and LSU #3. I don’t see how you can argue it any other way. Of course, teams should be ranked not just how they performed in their last game, but in all of their games, perhaps with slight emphasis on what happened down the stretch.
LSU looked terrible and played a lousy game. You can admit that, right? They had 92 yards of total offense.
Was a lot of that Alabama’s defense? Yes, of course. But LSU played so terribly that I think another highly-ranked team would be expected to perform better almost by default.
They did it with a power running game, and the second best defense in the country. LSU has a big nasty offensive line that dominated games. They ran the ball down the throats of most opponents all year. Their defense stifled opponents all season long. It’s not sexy, but it was effective.
Oklahoma State would have been blown out by either team last night. The game matched the #1 and #2 defenses in the country—Alabama only allowed 9 TDs all season, playing in a division that includes 3 top 5 teams according to the final rankings. LSU beat everybody else they faced—but beating Alabama twice in one season is a lot to ask, especially when Saban had so long to prepare. Alabama only had one penalty last night.